Astragaal

Re: New Mechanic: Decoupling SPD from Running

Has inches/segment dissapeared as a mechanic?

Cant remember if 4th used it, but Danger international, Justice Inc and other original used it for vechiles.

Re: Opinion Fluff: Game Philosophies

Hi Schir,

Thanks nice to be here so far, looking forward to talking about the hero system again, even if its not 5th ed.

Just wanted to welcome Astragaal to the boards.

 

I think you will find most people here very friendly.

 

- Christopher Mullins

Re: Stupid Animal Questions

I'd agree that it gives an equivalences, but would say not the actuaility. Id say youd have a greater insight in what would be nessecary and condcucive to training goats than the average layman, but not anymore effictive, to use the knowledge Id ask for it to used as a complimentory skill. In short Id buy at least a FAM: Animial handling if I wanted to train my goats.

I'll buy that. I'd even go so far as to say that a combination of PS: Goat Herder and KS: Goats would give you the equivalence of Animal Handler (goats)' date=' plus a lot more knowledge and practical expertise, but not the ability to apply such knowledge and expertise to other animals, where Animal Handler would allow you to affect animals other that goats, though with a penalty.[/quote']

Re: Seemingly Silly Things to Model

For the sake of brevity .

It's just you. This one refers to the situation of literally being from a different world than everyone else is. Perhaps in the history you remember Ronald Reagan was never President' date=' or the Berlin wall never fell, or there are still dinosaurs running around doing their dinosaur thing.[/quote']

Re: The Munchkin Build Contest

I think mine would be, the 15d6 RKA for 8 points (Balanced by large and multiple side effects on a failed ego roll) or my favorite is perhaps the somple 1d6 EB, Damage shield, mamy, many levels of auto fire I had on a character called Jester, it was a "Repulsion field". It esstentially generates 1000s of inches of knockback against anything with body attacking the chacter, it was dicovered durnibg my application to join the team, when a chracter threw a granite ashtray at me to determine my defences, the rebounding ashtray penetrated the base defences and many hexes of ground before dissapearing making many in the group quite unhappy. This all hinges around the KB mechanic for autofire in 4th ed (highest kb from attacks, +1 per additional attacks that hit, Damge shield causing autohits with all autofire, thus KB is equal to number of attacks at +1, -xd6 for targt state.) And last but not least the cheapness of applying ads to a 5 base cost power.

Its 100% kosher, and very, very powerful, doesnt stop damage, but is very dissuading to martial artists and the like

Re: Seemingly Silly Things to Model

Think this is the age disad, or is that just me?

I'm Not From Around Here' date=' Am I?:[/b'] You are from Earth -- but not the same Earth as you are living on now and where everyone else came from. What is more, you have no idea how you came to be in the world you are in now. Because you were raised on a different world, a lot of things that go in are baffling to you. The history you remember is different, sometimes vastly so, than the actual history of the world you are on. Even if you speak English, you might use a much different set of idioms than everyone around you, making understanding people's conversations a challenge. Even the cultural norms of this world are unfamilair to you ("You don't practice ritual defloration at the coming of age? What kind of parents are you?")

Re: Seemingly Silly Things to Model

Max Luck and Max Unluck - Is what we used to call the Wierdness magnet. Even seen a character with 20 dice of each, Always on, Area of effect radius, Useable on and By others. An interesting time was had by all.

Physical Limitation: Weirdness Magnet?

Re: Seemingly Silly Things to Model

I think Old Kipling would approve, even though he is dead.

Holy anime nonsense/goodness! Rudyard Kipling would approve' date=' if he wasn't so dead.[/quote']

Re: Resolving a Combat in One Roll?

I guess anything where Im am not minus my own body, is nearly dead , including being on full body . But essentially I guess where theres life theres hope would be as good an expression of what I mean. Also I may have played long enough to have a certain faith on the sheer randomness of existance, or Ive seen things I wouldnt believe. The dice are fickle things, so if death is further away in play the a resolution or character choice, Id prefer to fight, if in play the next roll is fatal resolve it.

And to harp back to my original post I do say or at least imply that Id use this for spear chuckers, which the PCs arent generally speaking. Proper NPCs, would get there fight in system.

I thought we were talking about almost "guaranteed PC death"' date=' not [u']nearly[/u] "dead"

Re: Resolving a Combat in One Roll?

I guess I may have a broader definition of nearly dead than you.

Where the death of all the PC's is nearly guaranteed' date=' I would (as a player) prefer to make a noble sacrifice in a single die roll instead of play it out and watch everyone die.[/quote']

Re: Resolving a Combat in One Roll?

Thats a fair point, but I'll point out even though I say IMO dont kill them I do say let them suffer potentially large negatives following the same mechanics as they attempt to gain positives. In the case of a huge failure, even where PC death is almost guarenteed, I just think that its better to extend the playing of the PCs death out.

So the rule I suggest doesnt mean the PCs are not going to die in the first encounter, it just means when they do it will be in a proper extended fight not a simple Skill V Skill.

But let them earn serious bonuses if they are willing to die trying to achieve their objectives.

 

This might be a good explanation for why heroes often survive their first encounters with the villains (who easily could be applying their full force to crush the hapless heroes) - the villains don't know how tough the heroes are until after at least the first battle.

Re: I can't help it, I'm obsessed, made my own STUNx d6

Thanks for stating the obvious, but as the threads talking about a stun multiplier die I thought any further definitions on my part was kinda redundant. Anywhoo.....

Only on your Killing Attacks, you mean. Increased Stun Multiple is not available for other powers.

 

But you can certainly build all your KAs with +1 STUNx if you like. It really doesn't get you much.

 

5d6 KA averages 17.5 BODY and just under 47 STUN

4d6 KA, +1 STUNx averages 14 BODY and just under 52 STUN

Both cost 75 active points (I chose 75 so the math would come out to whole numbers of dice.) So you lose 3.5 BODY and gain 5 STUN, and that's relative to a 75 AP power! For smaller powers, the difference is proportionally smaller.

Re: Resolving a Combat in One Roll?

Tactics or Stratedgy used in a skill verus skill, +s and -s assigned for modifiers based on numbers circumstance etc.

Easy as pie, thats how Id do it, of course any decent/plot worthy fight would be played out regardless under the normal combat rule as I deemed fitting, but the spear chuckers need not be given anymore respect than the skill v skill.

A PC IMO should never die in the skill v skill, if they obviously do die run a combat within the bounds of the engagement then either kill them, or if they do enough to make you happy they live through the snafu let them live.

Or an easy way on a skill v skill, with all participating members at -1 body/differance in the skills. Or give the enemy the differance split betwen OCV/DCV as seems fitting. You could also compromise do the skill v skill but make players finish the fight, with the oppenent suffering the minuses. NPC auto killed on a differance of 10 or higher (GMs discretion, ie yes for goblins, no for body 80 dragons), PC never auto die, they could all start the fight dad if they fail by 30, but then 30s a pretty hefty fail.

Re: I may be overthinking this, but

I pretty much agree with with CraterMaker, but to me Overthinking is a negative, if there can be truly said to be an optimal level of thinking, then overthinking it is the mental equivalent of sending it to comitee adding definitions that obscure rather than illuminate. In short over thinking is detrimental and should be a Psyk Lim of some sort or a limitataion bought on either Int or a skill the character is prone to over thinking.

Eg a brilliant mathematician who has an awe inspiring natural grasp of numbers, but frequently overthinks give problem and presents work of dubous academic work on the whole, even if the odd phrase was brilliant.

Id buy that i any nuber of ways, +10 Mathematics Activates on an 11-, half the time he's focused and his brilliance shines through, half the time he over thinks and his work consequently suffers. Or as a psyk Lim, Tends to overthink maths, on failed ego roll 1 is added to the time chart for completion, when new ego roll need be made at -2. Each failed ego roll reduces maths skill by minus 2 although bonues would accrue from extra time. Over timer the ego roll gets harder and eventually there come a point he should give up go think on something else and come back to the problem later, probably itial time for completion to remove a -2 to the ego roll with a further -2 removed for every +1 up the time chart, of course he'd lose the bonuses through extra time, although the work he has made could be the basis for a complementory skill later, etc. If he concentrates and makes the Ego roll he does suffer the penalty, if he fails he over thinks it and fluffs it.

Or as a Stat you could even use +5 Int (not for maths or maths related tasks) +1/4 limitation or whatever., or use activation , or burn out.

Certainly, by adding the word complicated maths problems (14- or higher) you can tailor the modeling.

Re: Stupid Animal Questions

Would quibble that and say:

Animal handler enables you to train the goats/sheep what have you.

PS: You have be trained to handle goats/sheep what have you, you need not know how or why goats/sheep does a thing just that it does.

KS: Knowing of and about Goats/sheep what have you.

When I saw the title, I immediately though about questions about stupid animals. Little did I know we'd be discussing goats and sheep!

 

1) Sure, whatever floats your goat.

 

2) If I remember correctly, the money from the Wealth Perk represents total income/or a lifestyle that level of income would support. $100,000/yr represents a kinds upper/middle, or maybe even a low/upper class lifestyle. That kind of lifestyle should be what the character haves, and adjust actual income/estate/property/whatever accordingly for the campaign. If someone in the upper/middle class or low/upper class would own 10 goats, or would only need 10 goats to live that kind of live, then this character owns around 10 goats. Maybe he owns more, but can only draw on some of those resources (perhaps he has overwhelming financial obligations tying up some of his resources, leaving him with only a good middle class lifestyle instead of that of a flaunty rich guy). Maybe he owns less, and just has a large savings he can draw from, or has really, really good goats.

 

3) PS vs Animal Handler:

Animal Handler lets you keep your goats and sheep in line and well behaved on an individual level, and perhaps as a group if you train them to act as a group. You can also teach his flock tricks, like play dead and roll over.

 

PS lets you sheppard a flock without having trained the sheep because you know how they act anyway. You also know what to feed them and where to get natural resources for that food (that hill, not this hill, we ate and pooped here yesterday). It will also let you know the mood of the flock by observation, coordinate with other sheppards or shepparding animals (dogs are nice) and estimate the value of a flock.

Re: Is anything in the system correctly priced?

End of the day a point is a point you choose what to spend them on, all though Ive played Characters with growth in 4th Ed games, Ive never had 4th Ed growth as its a very poor model for growth. Growth from Champions II however works just fine so I used that, its costed in the hero system and it models better the same holds true for many of the rest of the powers/skills and thus to my mind are as valid as the altered powers in 4th. As Ive never read 5th Ed Ive no idea as to the state of play, but it sounds like the same kind of dissolution from greatness that 4th was.

Re: Am I being an abhorrent munchkin?

Not to mention that' date=' judging by the myths, Zeus might decide to get jiggy with the character at any moment in the form of a bull, swan, or cloud of golden rain. [/quote']

 

Hadnt got further than the post I quoted when I posted , but yes ultimatly it wa bound to be expressed as a 10 pt hunted in the end

Re: Am I being an abhorrent munchkin?

I don't see how being a member of the Olympian Pantheon could be a Social Limitation.. Could be a big Rivalry, with all the Gods jockeying around.. Could be Unluck, getting stuck in plots and such..

 

Joe on the Street: " Hey, theres Fury! G-Dammed Greek Gods are destroying what America stands for!"

 

Could be I'm missing something, tho..

 

_CraterMaker

Id say your missing that the character is part of the Greek pantheon and where as they might not be threatening American values G amn it. The characters is going to interact with them which will attract the attension of to be fair a group of very powerful, meddling beings apt to caprociously curse nations, destroy cities, throw lighning etc. All in all well worth the 10 pts.

Having read, the rest of the board, I think the first draft was perfect, I disagree about Triremes not being a TF and the piloting of Triremes in combat should be combat Pilot or Boating or whtevever the skill is now. Vons-D man says that package deals dont give points back, and didnt in fourth. I personally played the original hero system, Ive read Foxbat, absorbed Goodwin, know how Create works as a power and enjoyed Danger International, My copnception of the hero system is firmly rooted here. Ive never read 5th edition, bought Fusion I havent bought a new hero product since, or indeed seen one. 4th in my opinion is a dumbed down, lame generification of the finest, most adaptable and glorious game system to grace gaming. The point being in the pre 4th hero system, package deals not only could be disadvantages (ie be worth negative points), but any disads bought within a package deal where not considered part of the characters disads limit, so a 75+75pt character, can have 20 points of disads in a package deal and still have 75+75points of optional disads to buy. Again most packages cost between -5 to +5. But I certainly ran a camaign with package deals that could net large numbers of points for a character or cost a large number, I did a Judge Dredd package deal which cost several hundred points leaving Judges in the super human category, but limited to only slightly higher stat maxima through the package deal.

I think the designer of the post, in his first draft has an excellent character, well thought out, thoroughly defined I had no problems with any of the powers/skills/stats or disads. I only skimmed the other drafts they seemed to be over polishing and nit picking around. In short if I was running you Id be very happy to have a player who knows and has the will to make a good character.

Re: Am I being an abhorrent munchkin?

Id say your missing that the character is part of the Greek pantheon and where as they might not be threatening American values G amn it. The characters is going to interact with them which will attract the attension of to be fair a group of very powerful, meddling beings apt to caprociously curse nations, destroy cities, throw lighning etc. All in all well worth the 10 pts.

Re: Opinion Fluff: Game Philosophies

Hi Im new, nice to meet you my reply is in the quote, below.

Game Philosophies

 

Authority

1) GM: The GM is the final authority on all decisions in the game he alone is running.

2) Group: The Group is the final authority on all decisions in the game via a voting method.

3) Rules: Rules are created and used to define who has final authority in different circumstances.

 

Astragaal: 3 in the main, occationally 2, but ultimatly 1. I played in a very well versed group, almost everyone ran the hero system (or indeed many others), we all knew the rules backwards and we all enjoyed reaching a satifactory answer. Mostly, when an ambiguity/bone of contension arises the rules are consulted this will usually provide an answer that is biased to one answer over the other. In case where this doesnt happen views are voiced, mechnics that work are i guess judged on economy and elegance usually agreement isnt a contest as one interpretation is fitting, in cse of a tie or over complex ruminations overly disrupting play (a highly subjective time vairable, with correlation to the actions hapening in game. Eg. in combat short pause/discussion no longer than it takes to refill beverages and take a toilet break. To longterm actions which could end up with group working out mechanics/devises to do something esoteric and wise ranging like overthrowing a goverment by market manipulation which may take a game session or more to hammer out. The latter example being extreme for illustrative purposes. If all of that doesnt work the DMs job is to fudge it, and start everyone roleplaying again. His/her fudge is now the campaign fudge and is deemed a rule, to be later fudge and refined through the above process, of gently kicking the system into what works for you and your group. In my expiearance the most time consuming period is character creation as everyone I played with made very detailed, highly crafted, downright obtuse and months could pass before a character was ready for play.

 

Interpretation

1) Closed Rule Interpretation: If the rules do not specify something, it is disallowed pending Authoritative Permission.

2) Open Rule Interpretation: If the rules do not specify something, it is allowed pending Authoritative Restriction.

3) Guideline Rule Interpretation: A set of guidelines are used to show what things fall into Closed Rule Interpretation and/or what things fall into Open Rule Interpretation.

 

Astragaal: Not sure I grasp this point clearly, but as far as interpretation if it is unambiguous there is no need to interpret, although it is still possable to disagree. If there is an amiguity, it needs dealing with. I suppose the authority answer would be the guideline for doing this.

 

Group Dynamic

1) Membership Group: Potential players are excluded until Authorititative Permission is granted.

2) Public Group: Potential players are included until Authoritative Permission is denied.

3) Tournement Rules: A set of rules determines who is excluded or included.

 

Astragaal: Highly variable according to the circumstnces, but never 3 and for the most part 2, the more the merrier. Ultimatly the IC group dynamics are often much for influential in this point than the OOC group dynamics.

 

Ambiguity Resolution Timing

1) Rigid: The Authority strives to streamline play by reducing as many rules debates as possible by specifying the rules up front. The Authority decides the resolution and the game continues with that decision.

2) Freeform: The Authority strives to streamline play by only debating rules as ambiguous situations arise during game play. The Authority decides the resolution and the game continues with that decision.

 

Astragaal: Id have to say both, and my answers above I think cover this. But 1, modified by 2 when nessecary. In that the rules up front as the group I play in knows the rule, these remain hard and fast until they dont work. Discuss, then rule and back to gaming.

 

The philosophies presented presume that there is a trust between the Players and GM and that trust will not be violated by either Players or GM.

 

I am sure there are others I'm missing so I'll add any that people bring up for discussion.

 

What philosophies do you follow?

 

Astragaal: My Philosophy of gaming would be: If it aint broke dont fix it, if it is broke fix it. If it cant be fixed, fudge it. If it cant be fudged, ignore it. If it cant be ignored, roll a die. When playing listen IC, react IC, think IC, live IC. When Dming listen to their characters, react to their characters, think of their characters, and let the world/game live through their chracters.

Ultimatly although connected discussing game mechanics and roleplaying are sperate I/we just enjoy both, but roleplaying is the goal, the rules are just the pitch on which we play.

By that I include both DMing and playing wether be those in the book or those house rules that are in effect, if a player or Dm wants to alter the "Rules" a justification is required, yes even the Gm must justify him/her self, in the Dms case this can be as simple as "because I say so." Out of game play this is likely to be accepted, but may be disagreed with. If in play the "bacause I said so." line would not be so accepted and depending on the magnitude of the change and the arbitrariness of the rules change and the circumstance of the rules change, especially if the said rule dramatically changes the outcome. Face may end up smiling, shrugging, get bent out of shape, reddened or even remove themselves.

 

Lastly, Im old, not so much in years, but certainly in spirit, I tend to ramble on so I hope that made some sence. As Im new to these boards Im sure theres a wwole level of "inness" Im not privy to so I'll clarify and and ramble til I get a feel for the place, although from what I read I feel strangly at home, gaming philosophy wise and weird arcane geekness wise.

 

 

- Christopher Mullins

Re: I can't help it, I'm obsessed, made my own STUNx d6

If I ever play in one of your games remind me to buy +1 stun mod on all my powers. Muhaha etc